From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Wed Aug 28 17:20:07 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B15FFE20FE for ; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 17:20:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from eugen@grosbein.net) Received: from hz.grosbein.net (hz.grosbein.net [IPv6:2a01:4f8:c2c:26d8::2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "hz.grosbein.net", Issuer "hz.grosbein.net" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46JXYf6D6Fz4SZK for ; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 17:20:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from eugen@grosbein.net) Received: from eg.sd.rdtc.ru (eg.sd.rdtc.ru [IPv6:2a03:3100:c:13:0:0:0:5]) by hz.grosbein.net (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id x7SHK2hT076927 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 28 Aug 2019 17:20:03 GMT (envelope-from eugen@grosbein.net) X-Envelope-From: eugen@grosbein.net X-Envelope-To: vit@otcnet.ru Received: from [10.58.0.4] ([10.58.0.4]) by eg.sd.rdtc.ru (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id x7SHJww1028691 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Thu, 29 Aug 2019 00:19:58 +0700 (+07) (envelope-from eugen@grosbein.net) Subject: Re: finding optimal ipfw strategy To: Victor Gamov , freebsd-net@freebsd.org References: <4ff39c8f-341c-5d72-1b26-6558c57bff8d@grosbein.net> <568ed3e1-caec-3988-16a5-0feea80f1630@grosbein.net> <56f81118-a584-01b4-238f-57f9d52a0fc6@otcnet.ru> <2751a318-c26b-a14d-0a18-bbd810849606@grosbein.net> From: Eugene Grosbein Message-ID: Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2019 00:19:50 +0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,LOCAL_FROM, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Report: * -2.3 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% * [score: 0.0000] * 0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record * -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record * 2.6 LOCAL_FROM From my domains X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on hz.grosbein.net X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 46JXYf6D6Fz4SZK X-Spamd-Bar: ---- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=permerror (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of eugen@grosbein.net uses mechanism not recognized by this client) smtp.mailfrom=eugen@grosbein.net X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.63 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[grosbein.net]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; R_SPF_PERMFAIL(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.98)[-0.981,0]; IP_SCORE(-1.55)[ip: (-3.95), ipnet: 2a01:4f8::/29(-1.97), asn: 24940(-1.80), country: DE(-0.01)]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:24940, ipnet:2a01:4f8::/29, country:DE]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[] X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2019 17:20:07 -0000 28.08.2019 23:58, Victor Gamov wrote: > P.S. Two questions about rules syntax optimization. What is more effective: > skipto tablearg udp from any to table(AllMcast_out) > or > skipto tablearg udp from any to table(AllMcast_out) out xmit vlan* Can't tell, this heavily depends on table contents and internal order of checks in kernel part of ipfw but general rule should still apply: less checks, better performance. > I hope I can place such rule at top of ruleset and only allowed multicast packets outgoing via VLANs interfaces will hit this rule. > > and second: > allow udp from $src1 to { 239.1.2.55 or 239.1.2.56 } > or > allow udp from src1 to 239.1.2.0/24{55,56} Last one should me much more efficient as it just needs to perform a couple of 32-bit masking operations and previous one is more general (IP addresses may belong to different networks) and requires slower search.